then transcribe a letter from William Sullings economist humanist and spokesman of the Humanist Movement in Argentina.
CONSIDERATIONS ON CONFLICT OF RESERVES
is clear that the conflict arising over the use of Central Bank reserves, can be analyzed from at least two points of view, economic policy, and the politics itself. And it will be good to consider these approaches separately, to prevent the weights from one condition the other.
Because from the political standpoint, it is clear that we face a new onslaught of sectors "destituyentes" (modern variant of the reactionary coup), which has the conflict with the farmers continue to look forward and encourage any potential rift in the government to move forward. We're talking about a kind of alliance between economic and media power, with some opportunistic political opposition, now tearing their hair out over the fate of "reservations of the Argentine," which have not hesitated to repeatedly emptying by capital flight. Despite that capital flight fueled by these sectors, the management reserves Kirchner increased from 8,000 to 48,000 million dollars. And against this new attack destituyente, it is clear that we must report such intentions, full of hypocritical arguments. For the much talked about independence Central Bank which claims to defend, as if it were a bulwark of democracy and the division of powers is merely defending one of the pillars of neoliberalism: to steal the State management of monetary policy and exchange rate, putting it in the hands of technocrats who eventually respond to their true master, the international financial power.
And it is clear that this claim to these sectors related to neoliberalism must be accompanied by a defense of democratic stability, supporting the right of the executive branch to have sovereign use of the reserves, without asking any technocrat. And this position must be clear and forceful, not weaken it with relativism that will facilitate the game destituyentes opponents.
However, that position does not mean that we should self-convinced that everything government does is well done, and here we enter the topic of weight to economic policy.
First we can say that the government has many pending issues in reversing the conditions that left neoliberalism in Argentina, and one of them is the Central Bank Charter. This dates from 1991, the beginning of the Menem era, the decade in which many Latin American countries to adapt the operation of their central banks to the dictates of international financial capital (Chile 1989, Colombia 1991, Mexico 1994, Venezuela 1992), following the models which had hitherto prevailed in USA, Switzerland and Germany. With the argument that governments sometimes "abused" control of their monetary policies, and "irresponsible handling" of the issue of currency and exchange policy generated inflationary processes, was removed to the same control over their own central banks , giving these great autonomy, to be managed by technocrats trained in the centers of power and with strong links to their pictures. Of course, this process was implemented by governments obedient, they borrowed us, which we tied to the ICSID and in some cases to the TLC. But at this point is the responsibility of modern governments to reverse these decisions, and the Argentine government did in its proper place, and today we have the result with the rudeness of Redrado, the best style "smarmy."
Moreover, the intention to cancel debt with reserves, deserves some further analysis. As we have seen at the time, the decision to cancel debt reserves with the IMF, to get rid of their burdens, within a certain context, it was a wise decision. But it would have been desirable as a result of this liberation, the government did not exercise had been limited to neo-Keynesian policies, but further progress had been made towards a profound transformation of the tax system and financial institutions law. It would have been desirable also had used part of the growing reserves to settle the disastrous state of health and public education.
also worth remembering that the issue of external debt has undergone transformations over the years. In the 80 inherited debt had been incurred by de facto governments, and creditors were international banks, and this was the time to denounce and reject illegitimate debt payment, forming a bloc of Latin American debtors. But the opportunity was missed Brady Plan and through the banks got rid of the debt securities, which were passed into the hands of savers, pension funds, and largely became the savings of workers affiliated to the Pension Funds. Argentine simultaneously repeatedly voted for a government that assured them a cheap dollar at the expense of increasing debt. In short, unfortunately, governments supported by the people legitimized the current debt, while some of the creditors also became victims of a pre-orchestrated scam. In this context the refinancing completed after the default resulting in a lesser evil caused by a chain of circumstances.
However, when meeting the obligations entailed by such refinancing, is still prosecuting those who got rich and were responsible for the original debt, and force them to respond with their heritage to remove at least part of that debt.
Moreover, while actual use of free reserves to ensure compliance with commitments to creditors, will improve the chances of Argentine companies to obtain credit at reasonable rates, this argument is still conditioned by the logic of neoliberal financial system than we would like to leave quickly. Ideally, the Latin American countries, instead of placing our reserves in the hands of international usury, and then ask them to please give us a reasonable rate, we set up a fund for Latin American banks to finance regional development with interest-free loans. That's an old humanist proposal seemed headed toward which the South Bank, but never finished consolidated.
In short, we must reject the onslaught of opportunistic opposition destituyente, and you have to ask us to change the charter of the Central Bank that serves the government elected by the people, not the service of financial power. But we must also ask to use reserves to finance the development and welfare of the Argentine and somehow pay the debt which is enriched with neoliberalism and convertibility. Guillermo
Sullings - 18/01/2010
0 comments:
Post a Comment